“The real story here is… everyone is ready to believe that AI can do things, even if it can't,” Willison told Ars. “In this case, it's pretty clear what's going on if you look at the wider context of the show in question. But anyone without that context, [a viewer] is much more likely to believe that the whole thing was AI-generated… thanks to the massive ramp up in the quality of AI output we have seen in the past 12 months.”

@simon I’m not able to read the article, but it sounds like a copyright claim issue. Why would it be any less of a copyright violation if it wasn’t A.I.? That is, they claim they wrote it and not A.I., so does that change the copyright infringement claim?

@ramsey @simon I had the same thought. Then again, if it was a parody, what would be the difference between an AI and an impersonator? This is all so murky, right now.

@gadgetboy @simon @tappenden So, it sounds like what is at issue isn’t that the content of the podcast itself violates Carlin’s copyright, but the estate contends they trained an AI using copyrighted materials, and that’s what they are suing over. This is pretty interesting.